[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2018] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> you are watching american history tv, all weekend, every weekend on c-span3. to join the conversation, like us on facebook. "reel america," ronald reagan appeared on face the nation to take questions from journalists. he discusses the 1968 presidential candidates and also discusses liberalism, ,onservatism, student protests

the assassination of robert kennedy in what he argues are the failures of >> of the senator reagan, the consensus was that for two days, you conducted yourself like the candidate for the nomination. do you contend you are still not a nominee for either office? >> at no. of the meetings. i can't remember anything i did on the outside except agree to a press conference that was asked of me. iner than that, i was meetings. >> and tulsa oklahoma at the , face the congress nation. a spontaneous interview with governor ronald reagan of california. you will be questioned by paul

hope of the washington star and cbs correspondents martin. we will resume the interview in a moment. >> governor, why don't we get back to that question. do you still maintain your not a possible contender? >> i am certainly not a contender for the vice presidential office. technically you would have to recognize anyone who is a favorite son candidate, even though he is a favored son candidate only in the sense of directing a delegation are hoping to, that technically a the convention he is a candidate, he is centered in nomination and would be a candidate if the party chose. >> technically, you are candidate you? >> do mean that the convention? >> i mean now, at the convention. >> certainly not now. i have not injected myself into

the race nor would i. but at the convention i use the word technically, because it is true that you are actually placed in nomination. that is true of me as well as a number of other favorite son candidates. i have said for some time that i believe this is going to be an open convention. therefore, if the delegates choose to consider other than the announced candidates, they will do so. nothen you say you have conducted yourself here, governor, as a possible contender, you are talking perhaps about euro and attitude. but what about the attitude of the people are that delegates. you don't really decide for yourself. no man going into a convention does. >> i have said this for a long time. i think the people do. the job seeks rather than someone seeking it. this you have very little

control of her. i am aware of a very many people who have expressed this belief with regard to me. i'm greatly honored that anyone should consider me and that light. myannot say that i am doing job and i'm doing nothing to encourage are trying to set up any organization to promote that. >> you have carried yourself you are notyou say considering yourself as a candidate for the vice president and you can't help but if you go to the favorite son nomination. whichyou address yourself candidate of the two men who do say they want to be president gets the nomination. nixon or rockefeller? which of those two could you most easily make common cause with? to not onlyi have be a visa of but avoid the

answer. we have only had one organizing meeting so far and that was prior to officially placing them on the ballot or getting them recognized on the ballot after delegation. i have asked all not to give any opinion as to who they might favor at the time comes to make a move in some direction in order to have a single delegation to begin with. it would hardly behoove me to toe on television nationwide come on television and announce candidate preference. >>. you feel an obligation to lead the people, to tell them who you are for? mr. reagan: we are here on the basis of a broad-based delegation. if we had decided on advance, we would send a delegation of people who work having that. delegation from

california representing all whole spectrum. inple who are actively support of various candidates on that delegation and have passed support for those delegations. the idea of not having an open delegation in the interest of uniformity, when all of the facts are in and it is time to make a decision on who we think will be the winner of the next president of the united states will say nothing of that form decisions. hopefully our delegation can as ite itself and operate unit for the best interest -- >> aren't you really playing it a little cozy with expecting something will develop for for you at the convention? mr. reagan: no, i do not think so. the only thing i can give you as way of prevent sincerity is i was the one who is opposed to a favorite son candidacy and this

was announced after i was elected at a joint press conference. the lieutenant governor stated then he was going to do everything he could in the interest of unity. staterty leaders and our central committee officers persuaded me i should be the favorite son candidate. get one thing, props you could tell us -- would you say your political philosophy was closer to that of mr. nixon or mr. rockefeller? mr. reagan: you could probably say that to me. >> no -- >> i think on the basis of views expressed, for example right now the vietnam conflict or on the or the involvement of government and the solution of some problems, yes. i think this would be a fair statement. be a fairuld statement?

mr. reagan: that i have perhaps tended toward solutions of national problems more in the same context that richard nixon has then i have, at times, with rockefeller. >> take this a step further, governor. when we took about the convention of delegates, there are estimates ranging from 38% -60 4%. goldwater delegates returning this year to miami. do you see yourself as the only hope of the conservatives in the party? they are certainly not going to rally around nelson rockefeller aroundy of them may not richard nixon. where else did they have to go except you? as you know, those labels -- i've been working to get the party to drop those labels. >> but many people do use them. mr. reagan: i think there is a different philosophy or belief in that republican party today at the grassroots level that the

republican party today is far ine willing to see good other republicans in the interest in unity and the interest of winning. there's a great desire. where fat our bloodbath and learned a lesson from it. -- party was virtually after out of existence of a few years ago. i do not think you'll have that problem. i do not think people are going into this convention frozen into a mold. >> let's not talk about being frozen. you said your political philosophy comes close to that of mr. nick's and then mr. rockefeller. coordinator, and he recently said perhaps we can side.orge wallace on our that is where he belongs. would you feel that george wallace belongs on the

republican side and would you welcome him to the republican party? mr. reagan: i think this is the decision -- of the george iflace is elong's on the -- george wallace belongs on the republican side he should register again. but he is still on the democrat side. i believe that anyone who wants to come into the republican party has come in by virtue of mind our philosophy. but we do not go out after someone by virtue of buying theirs. he found he was compatible and could believe in the philosophy of the republican party, then i would think his place was in our party and i would welcome him under the party under the circumstances that he subscribed to our philosophy. of herlook at his record governor you will find a number of instances where on domestic right ine has been line with the present democratic controlhy of government

and subsidy and regulation and so forth, which would be contrary to the republican philosophy of them moment. no question he is express some views regarding of americanism and patriotism so forth but i'm sure a fewt i am people disagree with. >> what about his position on racist problems? mr. reagan: he seems to have avoided that subject. too manyt heard statements, not that i've heard everything he says are paid attention but i have not heard that much has been said that -- >> that about against emigration, to make a specific point? mr. reagan: i happened to be one who believes -- first of all, i am incapable of feeling prejudice myself. i do not believe in discrimination. i certainly believe in equality all peopleity for and i believe the answer to the problem will come some day when

all of us in america will stop using, just as we have stop using labels in our party, we will stop-80 ourselves and using a word in front of american with a hyphen. >> let's go back to these labels that you object to but that most people in this country employee in, talk. liberal and conservative. rafferty,lost to max that is something much argued within that republican party that one represented the conservative wing you and the other perhaps the right wing. what do you make of that? onereagan: i recall hearing contender comparing his views and the other comparing his voting record with the voting record up senator george murphy. they came out about even with their support of the things george murphy stood for. now, i think the key co-rafferty

campaign, there were a number of factors. first of all the contender in this case has been a very successful contender in california. the winner of two elections by wide margins. one very wide margin. he is known to the people of california and the other did not campaign as actively, spending a great deal of his time in washington because senate was in session. i think what max rafferty himself gave a view to cannot be discounted too much, he said he believed there is such dissatisfaction on the part of people today with what has been going on that there is a kind of tendency of against the incumbent and set of the other way around. >> not just a swing to the right at against individual incumbents? mr. reagan: that's right. there is a sort of change. one candidate did not support

you, nick's in, or george rafferty, why? mr. reagan: you would have to ask him? it was a hard-fought campaign. they criticized each other but i think there is a basic adherence to our 11th commandment. they did not inject personalities and getting into that kind of bidders us at all. -- bitterness at all. he entitled to the nomination, having not supported the nominee in 1964. -- ieagan: i am support in am not in support of anything that will lessen our opportunities. i think the present of a chronic leadership has taken this country to a lack of leadership, actually. has taken this country down around the can lead only to

disaster and ruin. i think the issue is far more important than dredging up or remembering any past grudge. nomineeepublicans had a -- if the people do not know where the republicans stand if they do not tend about one another, how are they supposed to decide? mr. reagan: and california in 1966, we waged a primary in which we campaigned our views and what we would do as opposed to the incumbent democratic administration. the people made their decision on who they thought would be the best replacement for the administration. you state your case. you run against the opposition. this is a tryout for who was going to run at the big race against the other school. i liken it to attract me. if on wednesday afternoon, the kids go out to do 100 yards to going to run on

saturday against the others: a big track meet, you try to decide who is the fastest. you do not go down the track spiking each other. >> that is a different game, not politics. mr. reagan: i do not excel. --we are interested >> mr. reagan: we are interested in what the new candidate would offer as opposed to the present candidate in washington. there is no need to point a finger at any other republican candidate. you state your case, what you would do. >> it is always happened in every campaign, particularly in primaries. i'm sure it happened in the 1960 six campaign against you and george christopher. mr. reagan: i would ask you to go back and find one word i would have said against him. >> but he did. mr. reagan: well, whether that

had anything to do with the asult or not, people made decision. >> you said there was a fundamental decision against your view of vietnam and that of rockefellers? mr. reagan: i can't say i am a complete authority on his position. let me correct, if i gave an impression there that this meant i was supposed to be favoring one over the other, no. you asked a question i tried to answer but at the same time, and governors conferences, governor rockefeller and i have been in great agreement many times across the table on issues that were confronting us. is -- hast he announced, i don't know if he has explained a position on vietnam. when i said i was perhaps closer on that one, you are looking for an example. i think when i was actually

trying to say was that both richard nixon and i have, over the past year, spoken out against the limited work concept against all been policy and wub po -- against the n-win policy. perhaps knows and is placing a little more faith in negotiations or in some kind of compromise settlement than i find myself able to. >> you have no faith and a prospect? mr. reagan: i can hope for peace but i do not hope for the kind of peace that would result in a concession that would allow the viet cong to be part of the south vietnamese government. i think this would be the same as the united states government taking the custard no strike in partners.

>> the day after senator kennedy died, or perhaps it was the day demagogicou blamed and irresponsible leaders and and out of office. you said there weren't have set this attitude of lawlessness in this society. as i recall after that, you refuse to identify or failed to identify any of them. can you tell us, what kind of people did you have in mind? what are their names? mr. reagan: i did not say demagogic leaders, i said demagogic statements by people in and out of office. i demagogic statement can be deliberate, can also simply become listless on the part of the and a vigil who did not intend to be a demagogue. but one of the reasons for not naming an individual is to try to pick out and name one would be unfair unless you're going to compile a list of all of them and their statements and say here, all of the statements have contributed to this atmosphere. but we have had statements.

>> did you have senator robert kennedy's statement and mind? >> i can only tell you the robert kennedy in the last several weeks in california has actually been campaigning on the basis of healing the wounds, restoring law and order, stopping the violence in our country. >> who did you mean? >> i was not talking about individuals. i was talking about statements. and i repeat -- >> but some individuals make statements. mr. reagan: all right, and some may of been attributed to him -- >> is eligible to talking about? mr. reagan: this is kind of statement and talking about, statements making several years ago, that perhaps the jail records would be a mark of honor and this country with regard to being arrested for demonstrations and so forth. i'm talking about any statement of the kind that encourages riots. these could encompass a great

many commencement speakers who campuses in the last weeks, academic, judicial, public leaders have talked about encouraging supposedly just dissent, but encouraging the type of writing we have seen on our campuses. areaim these statements demagogic and i think it is time for any public official to think twice and any word that might be or anerpreted as a ticket admission form to go out and take the law and take the law into his own hands, we better think twice. >> you talked about a student protest. her when you draw the line it on our country?sts in mr. reagan: we have a built-in system for dissent. this is what we mean by famous beach, freedom of assembly.

we have a right to try to persuade our the lucid and send it elected officials. but i think it must stop short of interfering with the rights of other individuals. in a group takes over the administration and other buildings of a campus, where they interfere with the orderly processes of the administration, when they forced the cancellation of classes and studies on the part of the majority who happens to agree with them. in the attempt by force to prevent recruiters from various industrial firms to come to campus seeking future employees, with a go out in the street and stage civil disobedience. it is well and good to say they are staging civil obedience with the the idea that they were paid the price i being arrested, how do they repay the person who might have been in an ambulance on the way to the hospital who was blocked and held up by the demonstration in the street? out of the repay the person whose house marked down because of our department could not get down through the thousands of

people, let us in one of our california cities, who were attempting to attack a draft center? civil disobedience, taking the launch your own hands, you very rarely if at all can do this without interfering with the basic rights of someone else. in this case -- >> do you think the president should have left the poor publics campaign camp on land in washington? mr. reagan: no i don't. unless they were suitable for camping. unless they were coming into an area where this was the custom and this was proper? frankly, i am in disagreement with this particular march and i am in disagreement with the governments acceptance of it on the basis not of disagreeing with the girls. i think all of us want to do all we can to lift the standard of living, to bring everyone up as high as they can be brought to enjoy the things the society of i think afford but

there is a grave disillusionment coming to many people. first of all, they can persuade the congress to pass some law that can eliminate or alleviate poverty is a falsehood. many people are deluded into believing this can take place. there's nothing one with the american people are the american government pause attitude toward poverty. our record proves, we've spent billions of dollars and hundreds of programs and hundreds of programs in a legitimate effort to try to find an answer to this problem. the truth this is the manner in which we have done it that has failed. there is no lack of intent. they do not have to persuade can't -- congress two gillis of the for the poor. >> governor, they feel the revenue is not in sight for them. they sought this way to dramatize their vision.

this was under the ages of the right of the effort of the people to seek redress from the congress itself. would you disagree with the president and having them take the position they did in the shadow, as it were, of the lincoln memorial? mr. reagan: yes. a great many people are going to be deluded into believing this could result in some immediate answer to their problems. and whatack to dissent is needed in this country. a great many voices have been heard. one of them was the late robert kennedys saying virtually the same thing i've been saying in california. in california, he was advocating california.oing in a program to provide jobs to the poor, to the monogamy -- minority element. here was a place, proper leaders of the poor should be telling them to support those people today who are advocating a

change in the programs that are a failure. ,> even before the horror robert kennedy also spoke for comfort and control laws. you said will probably have the best laws in california in the nation now. mr. reagan: we do. up.r regret our time is thank you very much president -- mr. reagan for being here on face the nation. >> today on face the nation, governor ronald reagan of california was interviewed by a cbs correspondent, from the and next weekr -- the leader for a stronger gun control bella and the present of the national rifle association, which is fighting additional regulation will "face the nation." >> up next, we continue our look

back at the 1968 presidential campaign. former alabama governor george wallace ran as the nominee of the american independent party. he appeared on cbs face the nation. the self-proclaimed law and order candidate discusses what he feels are the failures and successes of the two parties. >> governor wallace, is your real ambition to win the presidency or is it to get enough votes to pick and does go to the white house? governor wallace: my real preference is to win and win outright. if you will follow me around in the country and see the reception we're getting from one and of the country to the other he, you can see we have a chance of winning the election on november 5 at the polls. >> from cbs